Evaluation system for a product having an evaluator system for inputting evaluation information, an evaluation calculation system for performing the evaluation and being a network interconnecting the systems

ABSTRACT

An evaluation system of products which allows a plurality of users to execute an evaluation calculation using the same evaluation algorithm and evaluation data, without a manager. The evaluation system includes an evaluator system and an evaluation calculation system. The newest evaluation algorithm and evaluation data are managed in the evaluation calculation system, collectively, wherein the evaluator system executes the evaluation by connecting to the evaluation calculation system through a network.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates to an evaluation system for evaluatingeasiness of assembling, probability of causing inferior or poorassembling, easiness of machining or processing, easiness ofmanufacturing, easiness of disassembling, easiness of recycling, etc.,of products, assemblies for constructing the products or parts thereof,in particular for household electric appliances, office automation (OA)equipment or machines, etc.

BACKGROUND ARTS

In the conventional evaluation system for evaluating products, byoperating on a separated computer is conducted input therein,individually, thereby processing from calculation up to display of theresult thereof being performed within the same computer. Namely, it hasthe structure being totally depending upon the separated computer, butexcept for external memory apparatuses and/or outputting devices.

Also, in that instance, when transmitting a plurality of informationbeing different in contents thereof, it is common to construct thesystem, so that a plural number of files on the results of calculationsare made or prepared, then the contents of the files newly prepared aretransmitted every time when such a requirement is made.

For the system for evaluating products, it is always required to executethe evaluations by using a newest information and/or system. However,for the product evaluation system at the present, since the system as awhole is stored or constructed within the separated computer,individually, renewal of the evaluation system must be conducted on theseparated computers, respectively, in particular when the evaluationsystem is used at a plural number of locations, therefore the work forrenewal operation thereof comes to be complicated and/or troublesome.

Also, when providing the different information of evaluation in plural,since the information is stored being divided into the plural number offiles and the information is presented or shown by exchanging orselecting the file(s) to be presented depending upon the requirement, itmeans that there also exist also the file(s) storing the results ofevaluation therein other than the file(s) presenting that information,in the computer which stores or construct the evaluation system therein,therefore it has a problem in a view point of leakage of information.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Then, a first object, according to the present invention, is to providean evaluation system, wherein the computer for inputting data for use inthe evaluation is constructed independently from the computer forexecuting the calculation, thereby realizing the evaluation while alwaysusing the newest information/system therein.

Also, a second object, according to the present invention, is to providean evaluation system, wherein the calculation results are provided, butwithout producing excessive file(s) that will be a cause of the leakageof information, as a countermeasure to solve the problem in view ofsecurity, which occurs when adopting a method wherein the inputinformation is calculated after being transmitted to other computer(s).

Further, according to the present invention, a third object is toprovide an evaluation system, wherein the input of the data for use inevaluation is carried out by codes, for convenience of data transmissionbetween the computer for inputting data for use in evaluation and thecomputer for executing the calculation thereof.

According to the present invention, for accomplishing theabove-mentioned first object, there is provided an evaluation system forproduct, having: an input device for inputting evaluation information;and an evaluation device being connected with said input device througha network, wherein said input device comprises: a function oftransmitting the evaluation information inputted therethrough to saidevaluation device through said network, and said evaluation device has:a function of executing an evaluation calculation with using theevaluation information which is transmitted through said network; and afunction of transmitting a result of execution on the evaluationcalculation by said evaluation device to said input device through saidnetwork.

Also, for accomplishing the above-mentioned second object, in the above,wherein a plurality of pieces of evaluation results which are evaluatedby said evaluation device are handled as one of output file.

Also, for accomplishing the above-mentioned second object, in the above,wherein an evaluation information being coded is used in the evaluationinformation to be inputted.

Also in the above, wherein an information depending upon tools or jigsin working time is included in the evaluation information to beinputted, thereby obtaining an improvement on accuracy in evaluation.

Also, as an example of the above-mentioned evaluation, there are listedup any one of easiness of assembling, probability of causing inferior orpoor assembling, easiness of machining or processing, easiness ofmanufacturing, easiness of disassembling, easiness of recycling, etc.,of said product, and a combination of those.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 shows an example of a total view of an evaluation systemaccording to the present invention;

FIG. 2 shows an other example of the total view of the evaluation systemaccording to the present invention;

FIG. 3 shows an example of an input screen according to the presentinvention;

FIG. 4 shows an other example of the input screen according to thepresent invention;

FIG. 5 shows an example of input information being coded, according tothe present invention;

FIG. 6 shows an other example of the input information being coded,according to the present invention;

FIG. 7 shows an example of file structure of an evaluation result,according to the present invention; and

FIG. 8 shows an example of file structure of an evaluation result,according to the conventional art.

BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION

FIG. 1 shows an example of an evaluation system for realizing oraccomplishing the present invention.

A reference numeral 11 indicates an evaluator system, and it comprises acalculation or processing unit 12, a mouse 13, an input device, such asa keyboard 14, etc., a displaying device, such as a display 15, etc.,and a network connecting unit 16.

A reference numeral 17 indicates an evaluation calculation system, andit comprises a calculation or processing unit 18, an auxiliary memory19, and the network connecting unit 16. Herein, in the auxiliary memory19 are stored an operation algorithm 20, an operation data 21, and aninput screen data 22, etc.

Here, for the evaluator system 11 is not necessarily needed theauxiliary memory, and for the evaluation calculation system 17 is notnecessarily needed the input device and/or the displaying device.

In the structure of the present evaluation system, operation flow of theevaluation is as follows:

Transmission of a screen for use in input is prompted from the evaluatorsystem 11 through the network 23 to the evaluation calculation system17. The evaluation calculation system 17 transmits the input screen data22 which is stored in the auxiliary memory 19 through the network 23. Inthe evaluator system 11, the input screen is displayed on the display 15upon the basis of the input screen data 22 which is received. Anevaluator carries out the input of the data for evaluation by using theinput device. The data for use in evaluation is sent through the network23 to the evaluation calculation system 17, every time when the input ismade, when the screen is changed over, or when the instruction is madeby the evaluator, etc. Upon completion of the input or the instructionfrom the evaluator, the evaluation calculation system 17 calls up theoperation algorithm 20 and the operation data 21 which are memorized inthe auxiliary memory 19, so as to execute the calculation for evaluationon the data which is transmitted through the network 23, and the resultof this is stored or reserved temporarily into the auxiliary memory 19,as well as is sent through the network 23 to the evaluation calculationsystem 17. In the evaluation calculation system 17, the result ofevaluation transmitted from the network 23 is indicated or shown on thedisplay 15, etc. Further, it can be outputted to the output device, suchas a printer 24, depending upon the necessity thereof.

Herein, as a means for transmitting the input screen data 22 from theevaluation calculation system 17 to the evaluator system 11, it may besufficient that the data is transferred by means of the languages, suchas HTML (HyperText Markup Language), etc., while such as Web browser,etc., which can interpret the HTML language is transferred to or used inthe evaluator system 11. Also, as a means for transmitting the result ofevaluation from the evaluation calculation system 17 to the evaluatorsystem 11, it may be also to be transferred by using the HTML language,etc., in the same manner as for the input screen data 22.

The operation algorithm which is memorized in the auxiliary memory 19may an algorithm for evaluating easiness of assembling, probability ofcausing inferior or poor assembling, easiness of machining orprocessing, easiness of manufacturing, easiness of disassembling,easiness of recycling, etc., of products, or may be one of combiningsome of them, or other algorithms). In any case, it is sufficient to beconstructed so that the evaluation information necessary for thememorized calculation algorithm can be transmitted from the evaluatorsystem 11 to the evaluation calculation system 17.

With such the system construction and steps for the evaluation, theevaluator is able to input the data for evaluation and to execute thecalculation for evaluation, upon the basis of the newest input screendata 22, operating algorithm 20, and operation data 21, which are storedin the evaluation calculation system 17. With the present systemstructure, also it is possible to extend or expand the system, even in acase where a plural number of users exist for the evaluation system,only by constructing the system of the each user to have a function ofrequiring the transmission of the input screen data and a function ofinterpreting the formats of the input screen data 22 and the file(s) ofthe result of evaluation.

Further, with provision of functions in the evaluation calculationsystem 17, of deleting an intermediate or interim file(s) produced onthe way of calculations, such as the file(s) of the calculation resultwhich is contemporarily stored in the auxiliary memory 19, and/or thefile(s) in which the input information is stored, for example in casewhere a predetermined time period is passed away from the productionthereof, in particular when the instruction from the evaluator system 11is shut down or when the connection of the network 23 is broken or downwith the evaluator system 11, then the excessive file(s) causing theleakage of information can be excluded automatically, therefore it ispossible to dissolve such the problem from the security view point, thatoccurs in the case of adopting the method wherein the input informationis calculated after being transmitted to the other computer(s).

FIG. 2 shows an other example of the evaluation system for realizing oraccomplishing the present invention.

In the present system, the auxiliary memory 19 is provided in theprocessing unit 12 of the evaluator system 11, into which is stored theinput screen data 22. As a result of this, the input screen data is notnecessary to be within the evaluation calculation system 17.

With the structure of the present evaluation system, the flow of theevaluation is as follows:

When the evaluator calls up the input screen data 22 which is memorizedin the auxiliary memory 19 of the evaluator system 11, the processingunit 12 indicates or displays the input screen on the display 15. Theevaluator carries out the input of the data for evaluation by using theinput device. The data for evaluation is memorized into the auxiliarymemory 19 as the input data file 31, for example every time when beinginputted, when the screen is changed over, or when the instruction ismade by the evaluator, etc. Upon the completion of the input or theinstruction from the evaluator, the evaluator system 11 sends the inputdata file 31 through the network 23 to the evaluation calculation system17. The evaluation calculation system 17 calls up the operationalgorithm 22 and the calculation data 21, which are memorized in theauxiliary memory 19, so as to execute calculation for evaluation on thedata which are transmitted through the network 23, and the result ofthis is stored or reserved temporarily into the auxiliary memory 19, aswell as is sent through the network 23 to the evaluation calculationsystem 17. In the evaluation calculation system 17, the result ofevaluation transmitted from the network 23 is indicated on the display15, etc. Further, it is also possible to output it to the output device,such as a printer 24, depending upon the necessity thereof.

Also in this case, as a means for transmitting the result of evaluationfrom the evaluation calculation system 17 to the evaluator system 11, itmay be sufficient that the data is transferred by means of thelanguages, such as HTML, etc., while such as the Web browser, etc.,which can interpret the HTML language is transferred to or used in theevaluator system 11.

Further, as was mentioned previously, it is preferable from the viewpoint of security, that the evaluation calculation system 17 deletessuch the intermediate or interim file(s) produced on the way ofcalculations, such as the file(s) of the calculation result which arecontemporarily stored in the auxiliary memory 19, and/or the file(s) inwhich the input information is stored, for example in case where apredetermined time period is passed away from the production thereof, inparticular when the instruction is shut down from the evaluator system11 or when the connection of the network 23 is broken down with theevaluator system 11.

Also, with such the system construction and steps for the evaluation,the evaluator is able to input the data for evaluation and to executethe calculation for evaluation, on the basis of the newest input screendata 22 and operation data 21 stored in the evaluation calculationsystem 17. Also with the present system structure, it is possible toextend or expand the system, even in a case where a plural number ofusers exist for the evaluation system, only by structuring the system ofthe each user to have a function of transmitting the input screen dataand the input data, as well as a function of interpreting the format ofthe file(s) of result of evaluation.

The evaluation system shown in the FIG. 2 is different from theevaluation system shown in the FIG. 1, in an aspect that there is nonecessity that it must be connected to the network 23 during the periodwhen the data for evaluation is inputted in the evaluator system 11,since the data stored in the evaluator system 11 is used as the inputscreen data 22.

Further, also with the evaluator system shown in the FIG. 2, having thenewest input screen data in the evaluation calculation system 17,wherein the input screen data 22 is transmitted through the network 23into the auxiliary memory 19 of the evaluator system 11 just beforeexecuting the input of the evaluation data within the evaluator system11, so as to perform the input with using the input screen data 22,thereby it is also possible to use the newest one of the input screendata 22.

FIG. 3 shows an example of the input screen of the present evaluationsystem. However, with this screen, it is possible to use the same one inthe both systems, which are shown in the above FIGS. 1 and 2.

As the input information in the present evaluation system, it isinformation relating to a product to be evaluated and/or an assemblythereof as a whole, such as, the name or maximum sizes of the productand the assembly thereof, etc.

Herein, on the input screen, it is preferable to make the items whichare needed to be inputted and the other items which are not necessarilyneeded to be inputted, distinctive from each other. Here, for thepurpose of discriminating the items necessary to be inputted from theothers, a shading of net-casting, etc., is treated on the item(s)necessary to be inputted. Alternatively, with provision of a device,such as collecting or locating the items needed to be inputted at or onan edge portion of the screen, so as to reduce an amount of movement ofa cursor, the operability or usability by the evaluator can be increasedup.

FIG. 4 shows an other example of the input screen of the presentevaluation system. Also with the present screen, it is possible to usethe same one in the both systems which are shown in the above FIGS. 1and 2.

As the other input information in the present evaluation system, theyinclude the number and/or the name of the product to be evaluated and/orthe parts constructing the assembly thereof, and the length, the mass,the number of parts, position (i.e., a high position, a low position, ora regular or ordinary position, etc.), an operation factor mark, arepair factor mark, etc. As to the means for increasing the operabilityor usability by the evaluator up, it can be said that the similar as wasmentioned in the FIG. 3 can be applied to, equally.

FIG. 5 shows an example of the operation factor marks, as an example ofthe input information in the present evaluation system, and FIG. 6 anexample of the repair factor mark, in the same manner thereto. Thoseindicates the examples of evaluation, wherein the evaluation is executedon the assembling or disassembling of the products or the partsconstructing the assembly thereof, on the basis of the moving operationas shown in the FIG. 5, and they are repaired under the condition asshown in the FIG. 6 to be evaluated.

In the present evaluation system, as is shown in the FIGS. 5 and 6, theinput information is coded. As a means of the coding thereof, forexample, the operation of moving of the part in the lower direction iscoded by “↓” or “V”, the operation of moving thereof in the horizontaldirection is coded by “→” or “−+”, for example, by attaching the marksfrom which the evaluator can easily image the operation, thereby theoperability or usability is increased up.

And, the fact that the input information is coded means the informationto be transmitted can be reduced down in the amount thereof, in the modeof the embodiment according to the present evaluation system, whereinthe input information is transmitted from the evaluator system 11through the network to the evaluation calculation system 17, so as toexecute the calculation and so on, thereby enabling to improve anefficiency of the whole system.

Also in the present evaluation system, as is shown in the FIG. 5, theinformation relating to the movement and the information relating totools or jigs are inputted as the operation factors. This is, becausethey are suitable for a means to express or indicate the characteristicsof the part, as an object of the evaluation, in particular in theevaluation system. With the information relating to the movement, i.e.,only with the information of the direction of movement, but it isimpossible maintain an accuracy of the evaluation, since the informationis omitted on the difficulty in using the tool(s) or jig(s) to be used.Further, only with the information relating to the tools or jigs, sincethe information is omitted on the direction thereof in using them, alsoit is impossible to maintain a sufficient accuracy of the evaluation.However, with using the both information relating to the movement andthe information relating to the tools or jigs, it is possible tomaintain the sufficient accuracy for the evaluation system, if addingquantitative information, such as the length and/or area of movement,the mass of the object of movement, etc., other than those.

Here, if the number of the operation factors is too much, extractionand/or selection thereof comes to be difficult, otherwise if it is toosmall, many cases occurs where it is difficult to express or indicatethe operation with an appropriateness thereof. As the number of factorsfor expressing the operation, the number of roughly about twenty (20) ormore or less is appropriate, and preferably from 15 to 25, for example.

As an example of an evaluation algorithm which uses those inputinformation, it may be one for evaluating each of the constructiveparts, as the objects of evaluations, upon the basis of the difficultyin assembling, machining or processing, or disassembling thereof, etc.,(as an example of the operation, please see the FIG. 5). Namely, it maybe possible to be one as far as that makes an evaluation on the basis ofthe total number of the points of the evaluation that the evaluationobject has, by setting the point to be large or small in an order of thedifficulties on the respective operations. For example, it may be one inwhich the evaluation point in each of the operations is subtracted frompoint 100. And, the accuracy in evaluation can be further improved by analgorithm, in which the each operation mentioned above is compensateddepending upon the necessity, in accordance with a compensationcondition when conducting that operation (an example of the compensationcondition, please see FIG. 6), therefore is preferable.

Namely, if it is the algorithm for conducting the evaluation upon thebasis of the difficulty on the operations, it is possible to use themarks described in the FIG. 5, and if it is the algorithm for conductingthe evaluation by compensating the difficulty of the operations with thecondition of tools or jigs to be used and so on, it is possible to usethe marks described in the FIG. 6.

Further, when setting the difficulty of the operations, the accuracy inevaluation can be improved without increasing the number of the factorswith which the operations are expressed, not only by setting thedifficulty on the operations by each, but also setting the difficulty ofthe operations when they are combined in plural.

When setting the combination of the operations, the evaluation accuracycan be further improved by setting, not only the examples of theoperations described in the FIG. 5, but also the examples described inthe FIG. 6, as an object of the combination.

FIG. 7 shows an embodiment of the structure of an output file in thepresent evaluation system. Further, with this file structure, thesimilar one can be used in the both systems shown in the FIGS. 1 and 2.

Herein, an evaluation result file 41 is a file which is produced in theevaluation calculation system 17, and in which a plural number ofdifferent evaluations are stored as one (1) file, and it includes, forexample, a low point order output for indicating the evaluations in theorder from lower point thereof, an input order output for indicating theparts in the order of the input thereof, an a detail format output forindicating the detailed information thereof, and a compressed detailformat for indicating the detailed information in compact. Here, arrowsin the figure indicates that the information is connected in thedirections thereof, and here is indicated that, for example, when“Detail” is selected by clicking with the mouse 13, the indication isshifted or moved to the “Detail” located in the middle portion of thefigure, while when “bbb” in the “Low Point Order” in the figure isselected by clicking with the mouse 13, the indication is shifted ormoved into the “bbb” within the “Detail” in the figure.

As a means for realizing or achieving such the function, there can beconsider a method, which has an information indicating the position ofthe tip of the arrow, such as a line number, etc., indicative of theposition within the file, for instance within the “Detail” in the upperportion of the figure, or a method, in which a specific name, such as“Tip of An Arrow of Detail”, is given to the “Detail” lying in themiddle portion of the figure, while in the “Detail” is contained theinformation of moving to the location of the “Tip of An Arrow ofDetail”, etc.

In the technology of the conventional art, as shown in FIG. 8, theoutput results indicating the different contents, such as, a low pointorder file 51, a input order file 52, a compressed detail file 53, and adetail file 54, etc., are divided into a plural number of files so as tobe stored, and those files are indicated by changing over the filesdepending upon the requirement made by the evaluator or from theevaluation system. Herein, the arrows in the figure indicates that theinformation is connected in the directions thereof, and it indicatesthat, for example, when the order of input of the low point order file51 is selected by click of the mouse 13 or the like, the indication ismoved to the input order file 52, while when the “bbb” of the low pointorder file 51 is selected by click of the mouse 13 or the like, theindication is moved to the “bbb” of the detail file 54. Further, as ameans for realizing this function, there can be consider a method, whichhas an information indicating the position of the tip of the arrow, forexample, an information indicative of the detail file 54, such as thefile name thereof, in the “Detail” in the upper portion of the low pointorder file 51. Also, there can be considered a method, for example, inwhich within the “bbb” of the low point order file 51 is contained aninformation indicative of the tip position of the arrow within the file,such as the line number, etc., for example, in addition to theinformation indicative of the detail file 54, such as the file name,etc., or a method, in which a specific name, such as “bbb of Detail”, isgiven to the “bbb” within the file of the detail file 54, while in the“bbb” of the low point order file 51 is contained the information ofmoving to the position of the “bbb of Detail”, etc.

By the way, in a case where a method of using a plural number of filesof the conventional type, as shown in the FIG. 8, is applied into theevaluation system using the network 23, the transmission of the filethrough the network 23 is necessary every time when the requirementthereof is made by the evaluator and/or from the evaluation system,therefore there is a problem that -the time of using or occupying thenetwork 23 is increased up. Also, the plural number of files arenecessary for the results of evaluation calculations in the evaluationcalculation system 17, and it is difficult to determine or specify thetiming of deletion of those files, therefore there is a possibility ofcausing a problem from a view point of maintaining the secrecy thereof.

Then, according to the file storing method which is applied into thepresent system shown in the FIG. 7, it is possible to handle or treatthe evaluation results as one (1) file, collectively, and it is possibleto inspect the plural output results having different contents, freely,without the necessity of the network 23, for instance, after completingthe transmission thereof once, and further it is also possible to deletethe evaluation result file just after the completion of transmissionthereof, since there is no necessity of storing the evaluation resultfile temporarily within the evaluation calculation system 17, if thetransmission is completed once, therefore there can be expected animprovement thereof in the view point of keeping secrecy.

According to the present invention, it is possible for the evaluator toexecute the evaluation upon the basis of the newest calculationalgorithm and calculation data, and for a manager thereof, even in acase where there are the plural number of users of the evaluationsystem, it is net necessary to conduct the renewal on the user's system,respectively, therefore it is possible to obtain an effect, being sameto that the systems of all the evaluators are renewed, only by therenewal of the evaluation calculation system.

What is claimed is:
 1. An evaluation system for a product, comprising:an input device for inputting evaluation information; and an evaluationdevice being connected to said input device through a network, whereinsaid input t device comprises: a function of transmitting the evaluationinformation inputted therethrough to said evaluation device through saidnetwork, and wherein said evaluation device comprises: a function ofexecuting an evaluation calculation using said evaluation informationtransmitted through said network from said input device, and producingplural kinds of output display list information prepared from pluralview points based on a result of said evaluation calculation, and afunction of transmitting to said input device as a result of executionof the evaluation calculation by said evaluation device a file in whichsaid plural kinds of output display list information are arranged incorresponding relation to each other, thereby reducing the need forretransmission of said information when a different view point isselected by a user of said input device.
 2. An evaluation system for aproduct, as defined in claim 1, at least one of said plural kinds ofoutput display list information includes an order of points in anevaluation made by said evaluation device.
 3. An evaluation system for aproduct, as defined in claim 1, wherein an evaluation information beingcoded is used in the evaluation information to be inputted.
 4. Anevaluation system for a product, as defined in claim 1, wherein aninformation depending upon tools in working time is included in theevaluation information to be inputted.
 5. An evaluation system for aproduct, as defined in claim 1, wherein said evaluation calculationexecutes evaluation on any one of easiness of assembling, probability ofcausing inferior or poor assembling, easiness of machining orprocessing, easiness of manufacturing, easiness of disassembling,easiness of recycling, of said product, or a combination thereof.